Mutcherson v. Care Core National

Fourth Circuit

Mutcherson v. Care Core National

583 F. App'x 47

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 2, 2014

DocketNo. 14-1370

StatusPublished

This text of 583 F. App'x 47 (Mutcherson v. Care Core National) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mutcherson v. Care Core National, 583 F. App'x 47 (4th Cir. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

[48]*48Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brenda L. Mutcherson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendant in Mutcherson’s employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mutcherson v. Care Core Nat’l, No. 9:12-cv-00833-RMG (D.S.C. Mar. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[48]*48Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Brenda L. Mutcherson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and granting summary judgment to Defendant in Mutcherson’s employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Mutcherson v. Care Core Nat’l, No. 9:12-cv-00833-RMG (D.S.C. Mar. 14, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

583 F. App'x 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mutcherson-v-care-core-national-ca4-2014.